Is there a process for getting added to the sheet? I’ve started to write some IFDB reviews, though I’ve got them embargoed until after the comp ends.
Anyone can edit the sheet, and I believe you can just add yourself a new column? Looks like they’re currently alphabetical by author?
2 Likes
Anyone can edit the sheet (I’ve made sure of that, if you have the link, you can edit).
Add a column where relevant (reg judges / author → alphabetical order), and add the link to the review when it’s out! 
~
Unrelated, but I added a list of milestones to the first post (passed number of reviews and such).
5 Likes
I added myself ready for reviews hopefully soon. I inserted a new column in the appropriate place alphabetically. But it didn’t set up the formula to count up my reviews. I copied that over from another reviewer’s equivalent cell in the spreadsheet. So all ready now.
5 Likes
The formula to count my reviews has a +1 spell on it.
2 Likes
Fixed it: there was one cell (for The Whisperers) that had a bunch of spaces in it, so it wasn’t visible but also wasn’t “empty” so it was being counted.
2 Likes
Well that’s an easy way to cheat the program…
----rubs hands, grins----
1 Like
I’ve linked the reviews I’ve found again on the forum.
Has there been any talk of the IFComp anywhere else? I remember last year seeing reviews on blogs of IF authors…
3 Likes
I suppose we could each set up a few Google Alerts, one for each game e.g. “IFComp Mayor McFreeze” … poke at the more distinctly named games and something will be more likely to turn up. Maybe throw in author name in the search too.
2 Likes
I haven’t seen anything come through the Planet IF feed except Wade’s review of Barcarolle in Yellow… that has most of the old-timers, I think? I don’t know how many people even know it exists, so I wouldn’t expect newer bloggers to ask to be added.
1 Like
There isn’t really anything new out there, though the month is young.
So far as Planet IF goes, I think that Josh is right about its demographics.
e: Planet IF used to post updates to Twitter, which I think had a bigger reach than RSS, but it’s stopped doing that (and a lot of us have stopped looking there, anyway).
3 Likes
Excellent - thanks! I’ll add myself.
2 Likes
Every game has now 1 public review (found and recorded in the sheet - please add a link if you find more!!)
Also we are getting close to a new median change…
and a 300 total reviews!
5 Likes
Here it is! @mathbrush 's review changed the median to 3!
3 Likes
Still in the wake of the bonus column I temporarily created – Barcarolle shows the wrong number of public reviews. This is because Mika is an author but his review is public.
I assume there’s a spreadsheet mechanism in place assuming all author reviews are private (based on column position? cell colour? Btw I could not change the colour of that review’s cell, so perhaps it’s autoassigned, but I imagine a way to flag it as non-private could be by the cell link not being labelled ‘Private’, which it isn’t; it is labelled ‘Review’). Perhaps this system could be rejigged by someone with the fu?
-Wade
1 Like
As most reviews are indeed private, the calculations and formatting take into account whether the author is private or not. This the same with the reviews of AKheon, which are technically public on the IFDB right now, but considered “Private” in the calculation.
I think the current distinction (Author/Non-Author) makes the most sense in the calculation, even if some author have made their reviews available to all. Though it is technically flawed, # Reviews - # Public in the sheet is a bit easier to format than # Reviews - # Reviews of Non-Author.
2 Likes
Yeah, it takes care of 99% of the cases. We could make it opt-in for the authors. Below is the code as-is for column D.
=SUMPRODUCT(not(isblank(E76:76)), if(REGEXMATCH(E$1:$1,"[aA]uthor"),0,1))
Below is untested code:
=SUMPRODUCT(not(isblank(E76:76)), if(REGEXMATCH(E$1:$1,"[aA]uthor"),0,1) OR if(REGEXMATCH(E76, "Public", 1, 1))
Pseudocode would be
Before: “if AUTHOR is not in the top cell, count it as 1”
After: “if AUTHOR is not in the top cell or the author marked a review as Public , count it as 1”
This doesn’t look too bad, but it could break things, and it might be awkward anyway. I’d think anyone who wants to make these changes should test them first. (I’m too lazy to at the moment!)
3 Likes
Also, one other thing … this pops up off and on, but Amanda and Tom’s reviews required us to rejig the formulas from column F to column E, because they were at the start of the alphabet.
If I put on my number munging hat, this is expected to happen 1/2+…+1/n times if we have n authors, or approximately (ln n - .42). That’s about 3.21 times by the formula, 3.23 in actuality.
Obviously that’s not huge and it’s little problem to edit stuff if it does happen, but for next year maybe we could have a narrow column E that’s intentionally left blank except for a header saying “separator so we don’t have to rejig the formulas?” Then start the spreadsheet proper in column F?
This is a minor thing but it was on my radar and I wanted it out there just in case others wondered about an easy fix for a small nuisance. I’m aware I’m getting into very-fiddly territory here. But I want it out there in case enough people think this is worth it.
5 Likes
For the Author/Not-Author thing, I realised it didn’t bother me much because Public in French is like… the audience (so non-participants/non-author) 
Done.
2 Likes